or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple's Samsung lawsuit notes over 60 million iPod touch sold
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's Samsung lawsuit notes over 60 million iPod touch sold

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
In its legal complaint against Samsung concerning intellectual property infringement claims, Apple revealed a series of new sales figures for iPads, iPhones and the iPod touch, offering a glimpse at Q2 sales and indicating just how much the iPod touch supports the iOS App Store.

The complaint, tracked down by Nalay Patel, states that "as of March 2011," the company had sold more than 108 million iPhones, 19 million iPads, and 60 million iPod touch units.

The iPhone's shadow

The new figure for iPod touch sales is notable in that it indicates how much the success of the iOS App Store is supported by the iPod touch. While Apple regularly reports iPhone and iPad sales, the company does not always break out the proportion of iPods capable of running iOS apps.

The installed base of 60 million iPod touch units suggests that roughly 36 percent of all handheld iOS devices are iPods, a substantial supporting factor strengthening demand for iOS apps. App Store analytics have indicated that iPod touch users also tend to buy more apps than iPhone or other smartphone users.

The iPad also bolsters the iOS App Store, but analytics indicate that iPad users prefer tablet optimized apps rather than being content running iPhone apps blown up to fill the screen. Apple has largely augmented its more than 350,000 iPhone apps with more than 65,000 iPad apps, creating new app business with the iPad rather than just stretching the existing demand of iPhone and iPod touch users.

Other mobile platforms, including Google's Android, Microsoft's WP7, RIM's BlackBerry and HP's webOS, lack a viable equivalent to Apple's iPod touch, with almost all of their focus being devoted to smartphones. Android licensees, RIM and HP are all developing tablets to take on the iPad, but little focus has directed to delivering an iPod-alternative.

Microsoft recently scuttled its Zune HD, the closest competing product to the iPod touch, but the Zune was never made compatible with Microsoft's Windows Mobile, KIN, or Windows Phone products, erasing any Zune "app halo" for its smartphone platforms.

Samsung recently announced plans to deliver an Android music player under its Galaxy brand (and it is covered in Apple's infringement suit), but Samsung also lacks the music business credentials that Apple has built over the last decade with the iPod and its iTunes ecosystem, and its Galaxy Player is not yet selling in quantity, making the iPod touch a unique entity in the smartphone market.

A peak at Apple's Q2 numbers

The wording of Apple's complaint does not clarify whether the stated sales numbers were reached by the beginning of March, at some point during, or by the end of the month.

Apple is expected to report actual sales numbers for iPhones and iPads sold during the first calendar quarter of 2011 tomorrow during its earnings conference call for the company's fiscal Q2. The numbers in the complaint, however, provide an early suggestion that Apple has sold at least 18 million iPhones, 4 million iPads (the wording does not clarify whether this only includes the original iPad or also figures in the iPad 2, which launched in late February) and around 5 million iPod touch devices.

A compilation of analysts' predictions by the Fortune "Apple 2.0" blog indicates a Wall Street consensus of just 16.23 million iPhones and 6.22 million iPads, while amateur or unaffiliated analysts predict sales of 18.03 million iPhones and 6.84 million iPads.

Both groups predict that Apple sold around 9.8-9.9 million iPods; the company has previously noted that about half of its iPod sales are iPod touch units. Those figures would harmonize with the idea of Apple selling around 5 million iPod touch units in the first three months of 2011, for a total of at least 60 million iPod touch units since it went on sale in late 2007.
post #2 of 18
So we have 186 million iOS-based iDevices as of March, not the end of. They might not have have hit the 200 million milestone by the end of the quarter but they surely reached it by their earnings call tomorrow.

Will they mention that in the call? I think they’ll definitely mention the 100 million iPhone milestone but the total App Store ecosystem is more important in my opinion.

Will they count AppleTV numbers in the iOS numbers? I don’t think it make much sense under their is a direct line to 3rd-party apps from Xcode and even then I question it since it doesn’t use CocoaTouch.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #3 of 18
The key phrase here:

"The wording of Apple's complaint does not clarify whether the stated sales numbers were reached by the beginning of March, at some point during, or by the end of the month. "

That makes the numbers very nearly worthless, except maybe for the iPhone number which is a good number if it's the end of March or phenomenal if it's the beginning.
post #4 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

The key phrase here:

"The wording of Apple's complaint does not clarify whether the stated sales numbers were reached by the beginning of March, at some point during, or by the end of the month. "

That makes the numbers very nearly worthless, except maybe for the iPhone number which is a good number if it's the end of March or phenomenal if it's the beginning.

It gives a minimum total units for the quarter across 3 products. That's something we didn't know yesterday.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #5 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The complaint, tracked down by Nalay Patel, states that "as of March 2011," the company had sold more than 108 million iPhones, 19 million iPads, and 60 million iPod touch units.

I think we need to remember that these are lawyers we're talking about. "As of March" means the very last second of February. IMHO, this makes it extremely likely that Apple is about to post a blowout 2nd quarter, a 2nd quarter that may represent a more than 100% increase in earnings over the 2nd quarter a year ago. And it's also likely to pump up its cash horde to nearly $65 billion with zero debt.

This from a company that has the second largest market capitalization in the world. Companies that big aren't supposed to be doing this kind of thing.

Apple: The oldest and biggest startup company - ever.
post #6 of 18
I am expecting to see a huge rise in my Apple stock worth the next few weeks based on this kinda thing....
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
OSX, because making UNIX user friendly is easier than debugging windows.
Reply
post #7 of 18
Only 4million Ipads = FAIL!
post #8 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

So we have 186 million iOS-based iDevices as of March, not the end of. They might not have have hit the 200 million milestone by the end of the quarter but they surely reached it by their earnings call tomorrow.

Will they mention that in the call? I think theyll definitely mention the 100 million iPhone milestone but the total App Store ecosystem is more important in my opinion.

Will they count AppleTV numbers in the iOS numbers? I dont think it make much sense under their is a direct line to 3rd-party apps from Xcode and even then I question it since it doesnt use CocoaTouch.

They should hit that milestone no problem. They probably sold 16-18 million iPhones in the quarter which would push them over the top, plus whatever they sold in iPod touches and iPads.

Who knows if they will mention it in the call.

My guess is that Apple will crush The Street's earnings estimates and that the actual EPS will be about a buck higher than the consensus.
post #9 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

Only 4million Ipads = FAIL!

Xoom, Tab, and others would love to fail like that.
post #10 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by shen View Post

I am expecting to see a huge rise in my Apple stock worth the next few weeks based on this kinda thing....

So is Andy Zaky
post #11 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post

Xoom, Tab, and others would love to fail like that.

Besides, that would be 4 million in January and February, iPad 1's only. Add another million iPad 1's in March and 2 or 3 million iPad 2's and you're looking at 7 to 8 million iPads in the 2nd quarter.

Figure another 4 million iPads in April. That's an installed base of about 25 million iPads in the first year of existence.

And that's just the beginning.
post #12 of 18
That is the real reason for the lawsuit. Apple has to put its foot down. Microsoft and Palm were able to come up with their own unique GUI's. Samsung should do the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Samsung recently announced plans to deliver an Android music player under its Galaxy brand (and it is covered in Apple's infringement suit), but Samsung also lacks the music business credentials that Apple has built over the last decade with the iPod and its iTunes ecosystem, and its Galaxy Player is not yet selling in quantity, making the iPod touch a unique entity in the smartphone market.]
post #13 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

That is the real reason for the lawsuit. Apple has to put its foot down. Microsoft and Palm were able to come up with their own unique GUI's. Samsung should do the same.

Well - MS blatantly copied the GUI from Mac OS, but some bad moves by previous Apple management arguably gave them rights. Still - theft is theft.
post #14 of 18
The more I think about this lawsuit the more I think Samsung is going to be playing a diminishing role as an Apple supplier over time. In the short run (ie, 2011 to early 2012) neither company will abruptly end the relationship because it would be too disruptive. But longer term (later 2012 onward) I bet Apple starts moving pretty seriously towards other suppliers. The notion that there is fundamentally something special about Samsung that can't be replicated elsewhere is silly. The notion that other suppliers wouldn't bend over backwards to get Apple's business is also silly. And finally, there is no way Steve Jobs (or his execs who seem to generally share his perspective on things like this) is going to tolerate a supplier who willfully (in his view) steals from Apple.

By the time 2013 rolls around, I bet we see a lot of Apple chips (SSD, RAM, and SOCs) being fabbed by somebody other than Samsung. Top candidates are probably Toshiba, TSMC, and GF (in that order). Dark horse candidates that I would not rule out at all are Intel and Hon Hai. (Intel because they want into the mobile sphere and I'm betting would swallow their pride and fab ARM chips for Apple to get there and Hon Hai because they want to move up the value chain and have proven to be a loyal, reliable supplier -- Apple might go into a tech-sharing arrangement with them, possibly contributing financing to building fabs).
post #15 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

The more I think about this lawsuit the more I think Samsung is going to be playing a diminishing role as an Apple supplier over time. In the short run (ie, 2011 to early 2012) neither company will abruptly end the relationship because it would be too disruptive. But longer term (later 2012 onward) I bet Apple starts moving pretty seriously towards other suppliers. The notion that there is fundamentally something special about Samsung that can't be replicated elsewhere is silly. The notion that other suppliers wouldn't bend over backwards to get Apple's business is also silly. And finally, there is no way Steve Jobs (or his execs who seem to generally share his perspective on things like this) is going to tolerate a supplier who willfully (in his view) steals from Apple.

By the time 2013 rolls around, I bet we see a lot of Apple chips (SSD, RAM, and SOCs) being fabbed by somebody other than Samsung. Top candidates are probably Toshiba, TSMC, and GF (in that order). Dark horse candidates that I would not rule out at all are Intel and Hon Hai. (Intel because they want into the mobile sphere and I'm betting would swallow their pride and fab ARM chips for Apple to get there and Hon Hai because they want to move up the value chain and have proven to be a loyal, reliable supplier -- Apple might go into a tech-sharing arrangement with them, possibly contributing financing to building fabs).

I agree, this "Apple's Samsung lawsuit reveals ......." that Apple is no longer afraid of disrupting its partnership with the Korean maker of what are currently critical components of its product line. If so, this means Apple has alternative suppliers, and wants to stop Samsung chip fabricators showing Samsung mobile phone designers what Apple is working on.

I think it is quite likely that Apple knew that Samsung has been doing this for some time and was afraid to stop it until they had a back up source of key components. Now they do.
post #16 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmmx View Post

Well - MS blatantly copied the GUI from Mac OS, but some bad moves by previous Apple management arguably gave them rights. Still - theft is theft.

Well - Apple blatantly copied the GUI from Xerox Parc, but some bad moves by previous Xerox management arguably gave them rights. Still - theft is theft.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...user_interface
post #17 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by peteo View Post

Well - Apple blatantly copied the GUI from Xerox Parc, but some bad moves by previous Xerox management arguably gave them rights. Still - theft is theft.


You are contradicting yourself. Either Apple had the right to use the GUI design or they don't. You can't have both.
post #18 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by xsu View Post

You are contradicting yourself. Either Apple had the right to use the GUI design or they don't. You can't have both.

I was just quoting the OP, and changed MS to apple, Apple to Xerox.

I always find it funny when people talk about MS "stealing" the GUI from apple when apple "stole" the GUI from Xerox. No one "stole" any thing they just "copied" ideas that worked.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple's Samsung lawsuit notes over 60 million iPod touch sold